People v. Engelson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Engelson

55 A.D.2d 960, 391 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10264

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 31, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 55 A.D.2d 960 (People v. Engelson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Engelson, 55 A.D.2d 960, 391 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10264 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered November 26, 1975, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Appellant’s contention that the judgment should be reversed and the indictment dismissed pursuant to CPL 580.20 (art III, subd [d]; art IV, subd [e]) is without merit in view of the undisputed fact that he was returned to his original State of incarceration pursuant to his own request. In view of the strong case against appellant, any errors that occurred in passing upon his request to bar cross-examination regarding his prior record must be deemed harmless (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan and Damiani, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered November 26, 1975, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Appellant’s contention that the judgment should be reversed and the indictment dismissed pursuant to CPL 580.20 (art III, subd [d]; art IV, subd [e]) is without merit in view of the undisputed fact that he was returned to his original State of incarceration pursuant to his own request. In view of the strong case against appellant, any errors that occurred in passing upon his request to bar cross-examination regarding his prior record must be deemed harmless (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan and Damiani, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.2d 960, 391 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-engelson-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack